It's Different Because They're *People*!

[neadods]

I joined metafandom because it posts interesting links to fannish happenings around LJ, and hey - if fanthropology is good, than more of the same must be better.

We'll see how long I last now that my first post has led me to Sprat's commentary on Real Person Slash: "I know this is a sensitive area in fandom, and I know there are a lot of people for whom this is, like, A Really Major Deal--not just a personal squick, but an actual ethical issue having to do with the right to privacy of the actors in question. And the thing is, I honestly do not understand why."

Because they're people, that's why!

I commented in the thread, and I tried to keep my tone reasonable, but I am one of those folk with "an actual ethical issue" about this, and it's very simple to explain why - whether the actors in question know it or not, whether they read it or not, whether they care or not, real person fiction demotes a human being to the same level as a fictional character.

There are levels of this, some not all that offensive. For instance, obligatory disclosure, I once wrote a real person fic. I put a fictional character on a Julia Childe cooking show, which necessitated having Julia Childe in the story. But I don't feel that I denigrated her because I showed her doing her doing her job. And I've read plenty of fanfics where the actor gets sucked into the character's world, or vice versa. When the real person is written in a situation dealing with their job, and written in a manner that fits their character as known, then - well, you can argue that a line is crossed, but it's harder to argue that a person has been damaged or insulted.

But when you start talking about private issues - love, sex, family - in a public fiction, then you start treating people not just as moderately fictional, but as dancing meatpuppets. Real person slash - particularly slash about het humans (I get the impression that Sprat is writing about Paul Gross, who is married) depersonalizes the subjects even farther into breathing sex toys. Sex toys that are getting their workout not in the confines of someone's skull, but right out there in public for the amusement of the masses.

How can you not see that as ethically creepy?

There appear to be two arguments in favor of RPS. First, that the actors are attractive and sell their sexuality in their work. But just because they're selling the sizzle, it doesn't mean they're signing away their rights to control the steak. Where is the ethical line between saying "if actors wanted privacy they wouldn't be actors" and "if women don't want to be raped, they shouldn't wear miniskirts"? Because from where I'm standing, I can't see that line at all. RPS may not be as violent or violating as an actual rape, but it springs from the same mindset - that anyone that attracts is responsible for slaking the sexual arousal - regardless of that person's opinion, interest, or even intent. The same can be said for stalking. It's a fine, fine line between just writing about fantasies with someone and making those fantasies real.

And y'know what? Even if you NEVER plan on making said fantasies real, if you publicly post something torrid about an actor and then go see them, what is it going to look like - to the actor, to the authorities, even to the rest of the fandom? Better pray nothing happens to that actor when you're around, because you've made yourself public suspect #1 without ever banging more than your keyboard.

Second, is the argument that "what they don't know won't hurt them." Well, yeah. The odds of someone finding a specific story about themselves are pretty low. BUT - that doesn't mean it won't happen, not with the global, lingering nature of the Internet. Plus, while the odds of a single person finding a single fic might be low, what about the widening pool of people associating with that person? Their spouse, their children, their friends, their parents - is it really safe to assume that none of these people will trip over the story? Equally important, is it safe to assume that because the story is not about them personally that they won't be hurt/shocked/upset/appalled? Do they deserve to be hurt just because you wanted to get your ya-yas off with a person instead of a character, and wanted to do so in a semi-public forum?

Not to mention that just because they don't say anything directly to you doesn't mean that they don't know. If you suspected someone of stalking you, would your first impulse be to talk to them, or to gather up your information and quietly talk to the authorities? Particularly if they might be going somewhere, say, a convention, where you might attend and they were worried about their safety? (I work conventions, I've been in fandom for decades. I am so not joking here. It only takes one stalker scare for a fan club to lose their star or for a previously wonderful guest to stop coming.)

Is it really all worth it just to be able to write a story about a real person? A person you don't know anyway? Trust me, no matter how friendly they are, how many interviews they give, you don't actually know them.

Think they're hot? Think they ought to be with someone of your choosing? For the love of sanity, write about their character and you can safely bang 'em like a gong. Fictional people doing fictional things is a victimless crime. But for heaven's sake, if you're attracted to an actual person then grant them the dignity of treating them like people!

And no, the golden rule doesn't apply if you wish people were writing torrid RPS about you. Get a sex life of your own!

Comments

[shayheyred.livejournal.com]

How can I put it more clearly than this: Sexual Assault Is a Crime.

[redstarrobot.livejournal.com]

So are defamation, libel, stalking, threatening the family of a public figure... any of which are just as much a part of RPS (beginning with the first two or three and adding as appropriate) as copyright violation is a part of non-RPS fanfic. Those offenses are situational and so aren't as clearly defined under the law as copyright violation, but they're there, and inherent in the genre. If an actor came across the story ginmar mentioned, where an actor's real family was used in a story showing him as a rapist and murderer, that's enough to show probable cause to investigate stalking and threats of violence to the family, right there. If Actor X slaps a C&D on a site, and there's a bit of a fuss about it, and he gets a reputation as the guy who denies being involved with Actor Y (and, ooh, have you heard the stories about them), that could easily affect his casting in the future. It's fiction, and everyone knows that - but that doesn't mean it doesn't cross a line into other criminal areas.

[shayheyred.livejournal.com]

First of all, there are always "stories" about actors, whether or not RPS is involved.

Secondly, if an actor feels he is being libeled or otherwise defamed, he should seek legal counsel. If an actor told me to stop writing RPS because it was defamatory, I have enough of a self-preservation instinct to desist immediately.

But it never happens, my friend, because they either shrug and don't care, or they find it amusing (as the LoTRps guys do). Honestly? Till such a time that I am told by the people being slashed or their representative that they wish me to stop, I shall do as I please. The arguments proposed here against RPS are irrelevant, frankly, until I RPS you.

[redstarrobot.livejournal.com]

The arguments proposed here against RPS are irrelevant, frankly, until I RPS you.

No, they're suddenly relevant now. I have been stalked online via fandom in the past, and I do find that statement threatening.

[shayheyred.livejournal.com]

I have no desire to stalk, threaten, RPS or otherwise disturb you.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

Hey, wait. I know Shay in real life and I can guarantee you that she will not threaten you or hurt you.

On the other hand, I'm not deleting this exchange because I think it's a pretty classic example of how easy it is for people to misinterpret what they read on the screen - as I think celebrities can easily misinterpret RPS.

[redstarrobot.livejournal.com]

I should clarify; I don't think Shay was threatening me or would stalk or RPS me against my wishes. (I seem to be one degree of separation away from having met her in RL, via someone else on my f-list, so I'm perfectly happy to extend some trust there, even if I had been more worried by the discussion here.) I do think her tone in that last paragraph was intended to intimidate; the condescending use of "my friend" and dismissal of my arguments by fiat leave little doubt, she was trying to intimidate me into leaving the argument. I also have past experience of people posting their fantasies about me in public forums and people outside the community finding those posts, and it's a situation I find intimidating. The combination of a desire to intimidate and the suggestion of a situation I find intimidating felt threatening, although I don't think it was her intention to threaten. I just don't like continuing an argument under those circumstances.

And, precisely as you say; the baggage we bring with us affects how we read what we read. Some percentage, however statistically small, of celebrities being written about will have had bad experiences with the situations in RPS as young men, and will be reluctant to admit that, either publically or privately. A writer has no basis on which to say that they clearly don't mind because no lawyers have been brought in. Lawyers are not a preventive measure against transgression, and legal action isn't the guaranteed next step of someone feeling their rights have been violated, particularly not when it feels personal.

[starcat-jewel.livejournal.com]

And publishing RPF is a civil tort, ever since the ruling in Carol Burnett vs. the National Enquirer.

Let's say it again, since people don't seem to be getting the point: it's not the thinking of it, or even the writing of it, that's the problem -- it's PUBLISHING it. And putting it up on a publicly-accessible website counts as publishing. The writer, the website, and the ISP providing the site hosting may all be held accountable.

[shayheyred.livejournal.com]

And the National Enquirer made a profit off their fiction. It was written to sell papers.

Has anyone made a profit off fan fiction? If so, tell me how.

Or get those legal papers ready, boys, because I'm still waiting to hear from those allegedly wronged.

::Silence::

Huh.

[nycdeb.livejournal.com]

As I recall, the Burnett case turned primarily on the issue of malice of intent - not the use of the piece for commerical purposes. In any case, profit isn't the legal issue in something like this. Distribution and broadcast is.

There ARE civil statutes (including sections of defamation, false light, intellectual property and image rights) that have nothing to do with commerical gain and they could be applied (in some states that would more likely than others). I know it's fiction. But that in and of itself doesn't shield the writer or the piece once it has been made public to the third party. Those statutes are not less applicable just because no one has filed papers. I'm not saying it's likely anyone would file papers - because it's not.

It's the same for fan fic. It's all in violation of copyright and everyone knows it and everyone in fandom who write it is okay operating with that knowledge. It doesn't make it less of a violation because the majority of it goes unread, unnoticed or unremarked upon.

But this debate is circular as well as cyclical. And really - no one ever changes their mind. To much articulation on both sides I suspect :-) It flares up now and again and then everyone goes back to their corners.

But it's late. I'm too tired to quote Black's Law Dictionary tonight and even if Michael Madsen were here and willing to act out some of my personal favorite fantasies, I doubt I'd have the energy. Well, maybe the cell phone one if there - yawwwwwnnnn - was - yaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwn. Or not. And so -
Goodnight, kikala
Goodnight, lizbetann
Goodnight, diannelamerc
Goodnight, shayheyred
Goodnight, neadods
Goodnight, ginmar
Goodnight, starcat_jewel
Goodnight, John Boy.
Goodnight thread participants.

Sweet dreams

[shayheyred.livejournal.com]

MWAH! Nighty-nite!
::turns off light::

[neadods.livejournal.com]

Several people have made a profit off of fan fiction. The owner of Dapplewood Press once bragged that she could afford to leave her job because she was selling so many zines. Bill Hupe made a living off the orphan zine tables when he was alive. Individual writers may not make much money, but some unscrupulous publishers can, did, and probably still do.

During the great Blake's 7 slash war, the star blackmailed Starlog into dropping one of their cartoonists because she was on the "wrong side" and several fans lost their jobs or had to fight for them because their stories were mailed directly to their bosses.

And then there was the Rat Patrol fan who spammed the fandom from her work computer and was fired when complaints were sent to her boss.

Fandom and fannish activities have documented real-world repercussions. Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing which stars suddenly slam down communications because they feel threatened or stalked, or what made them feel that way - but that also happens, and in those cases it is the actions of just one or two "fans" who have hurt the whole fandom.

[dawnie-faith.livejournal.com]

I'm not wanting to get in the middle of this argument, because I do see a lot on both sides, but you comment on fanfiction made me think of something.

The people who write those tie-in or otherwise authorized novels (such as Star Wars, Buffy/Angel, Star Trek, etc), could be said to be writing fanfiction, as it's their own story, it's just that they've gotten it authorized by those in charge and they follow the rule of 'at the end of the book, the characters must still be as they were at the beginning' (re: not dead, maimed, traumatized, etc) Of course, that's more in the Buffy/Angel case, as SW&ST seem to have their own book canon, but I digress...

Also, I don't think this is widely known, but in the case of fanfiction, it's not illegal to publish it if you're not profiting, because characters cannot be copyrighted (as of yet). There is some room to maneuver in there of course, as other things most definitely are copyright-able, but actual characters themselves are free for use.

My apologies if I've been telling you stuff you already know. :)

[shayheyred.livejournal.com]

No,acrually I didn't. Thanks!

[dawnie-faith.livejournal.com]

You're very welcome! :)

[neadods.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't be that quick to lump professional tie-in novels with fanfic - but I'll let the three tie-in authors on my f-list go into the details if they choose to.

[trixiesfic.livejournal.com]

Um, the distinction between Carol Burnett v. Natiional Enquirer and RPF is that the story the NE published was purporting to be *truth*. RPF is *fiction* and is generally marked as such. That's a really big legal distinction there.